760 réponses à ce sujet

[Pitznik]

Reorte wrote...

And we're back to having to consider the motivation for sticking the scene in in order to consider what it means - epic fail.

How is that fail? Being motivated by game to think for a moment is a bad thing? Tbh it is pretty much obvious, if you really need to consider the motivation for sticking the scene of a character presumed dead suddenly drawing breath under a rubble it is your problem, not Bioware's.

Modifié par Pitznik, 16 juillet 2012 - 09:50 .

[Reorte]

Pitznik wrote...

Reorte wrote...

And we're back to having to consider the motivation for sticking the scene in in order to consider what it means - epic fail.

How is that fail? Being motivated by game to think for a moment is a bad thing? Tbh it is pretty much obvious, if you really need to consider the motivation for sticking the scene of a character presumed dead suddenly drawing breath under a rabble it is your problem, not Bioware's.

Hardly. My emotional response is based purely on what I see, and that's largely the driver for judging a work of fiction. So all I get it "Shepard is not quite dead." First playthrough is where it really matters and I've no idea what happens then if I'd chosen something else, after all.

Thinking is needed for other things - considering whether I should destroy or rewrite the heretics, that sort of thing (although there was a depressing lack of needing logical thinking, i.e. puzzle-solving, throughout all three games). Having to consider those sorts of issues adds to the emotional impact.

I suppose not being satisfied with half-arsed half-measures is my problem, life is so much easier if you just accept what you'd like things to mean.

[Reorte]

Taboo-XX wrote...

You have all the information you need.

By your logic Janet Leigh isn't stabbed to death in the shower scene in Psycho because we never see the knife penetrate her flesh.

Is it so difficult to provide information to the gaps of logic with the evidence provided?

In that case all the pieces are there and shown. In this case they are not. We have the equivalent of seeing someone with a knife but no body, simply Janet Leigh's character never appearing in the rest of the film.

Were you satisfied with what got shown pre-EC? Because all your arguments apply equally well to a defence of the original ending.

Modifié par Reorte, 16 juillet 2012 - 09:59 .

[Taboo]

Reorte wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

You have all the information you need.

By your logic Janet Leigh isn't stabbed to death in the shower scene in Psycho because we never see the knife penetrate her flesh.

Is it so difficult to provide information to the gaps of logic with the evidence provided?

In that case all the pieces are there and shown. In this case they are not. We have the equivalent of seeing someone with a knife but no body, simply Janet Leigh's character never appearing in the rest of the film.

No they aren't.

There is no onscreen violence. This was hitchcock's intention.

You are already told he is alive by cross but or more appropriately, a time lapse.

The Destroy sequence ending is out of order for a reason.

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

v0rt3x22 wrote...

 BioWare was quoted at the SDCC panel - saying (in regards to showing Shepard being alive in the "Destroy" ending) -

we wanted to give them [the players] a little beacon of hope. 

and

 
We did make it ambiguous on purpose 

At the same panel - they were also quoted as saying:

 There is no canon ending 

Source: 
http://www.newsarama...ent-future.html 

Well here's my problem:


What good is a little beacon of hope - if (at the end) it won't mean anything?

Mass Effect has always been about Shepard's story - and many of us love Shepard - and some people even argue that Mass Effect wouldn't be the same without him.

Now if BioWare would like to send us a "beacon of hope" - that would imply - that they would like to give us hope that maybe Shepard is alive.

The only reason I'd get worked up about this "hope" - is due to the possibility of him returning in a sequel.

Otherwise that "beacon of hope" doesn't really have any meaning to me.
Wouldn't you agree?

Now - they also only show this sequence (as far as I'm aware) - in the "Destroy" ending.

That's the only ending they provide that "beacon of hope" - but then they go ahead and say that there is "no canon ending".

The way I interpret this is that they might be going two different ways: 

For those who feel that the Mass Effect series should come to an end - they can choose to sacrifice Shepard.
For those who feel that they would like to play on with Shepard - they choose "Destroy" ending.

Those are just my interpretations - but it seems very odd to me - how much good "a beacon of hope" is to me - when this is the definite end of Shepard's story.

He's no good to me alive, when I'm not able to play him.

Thoughts?

Ridiculous.  The Collector's Edition Strategy Guide BioWare sold said that "Shepard Lives" in the Destroy ending with high EMS.  Now they say it could be the last breath before death?  That's just a rip-off.

[Reorte]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Reorte wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

You have all the information you need.

By your logic Janet Leigh isn't stabbed to death in the shower scene in Psycho because we never see the knife penetrate her flesh.

Is it so difficult to provide information to the gaps of logic with the evidence provided?

In that case all the pieces are there and shown. In this case they are not. We have the equivalent of seeing someone with a knife but no body, simply Janet Leigh's character never appearing in the rest of the film.

No they aren't.

There is no onscreen violence. This was hitchcock's intention.

You are already told he is alive by cross but or more appropriately, a time lapse.

The Destroy sequence ending is out of order for a reason.

What's the order got to do with anything? It's pretty obvious that it's out of order.

You do realise that I accept that the intention is to show that Shepard is alive, I just find it an incredibly unsatisfying, stupid way of showing it?

[Taboo]

Well considering that it's the breath of someone putting air into their lungs I would venture to guess...

But no one here has ever seen a person die I guess.

When my grandfather died he made quite a few rapid breaths and then died.

An intake of air is different than the rapid onset breathing caused by the body shutting down.

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

maaaze wrote...

It is good for your headcanon ... you can imagine how his life would have continued.

but Shepards story is done...and that is good in my opinion...let´s explore something new.

explore new characters.

You could have done that anyway, without these lousy endings.  Just show Shepard in retirement or as someone you might consult with a new character in the future--a kind of Anderson or Hackett figure.

BioWare will soon realize that this was a terrible decision and really bad writing.  I suspect that's why you couldn't find the writers responsible for this ending at SDCC with a search party.

[Taboo]

Reorte wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Reorte wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

You have all the information you need.

By your logic Janet Leigh isn't stabbed to death in the shower scene in Psycho because we never see the knife penetrate her flesh.

Is it so difficult to provide information to the gaps of logic with the evidence provided?

In that case all the pieces are there and shown. In this case they are not. We have the equivalent of seeing someone with a knife but no body, simply Janet Leigh's character never appearing in the rest of the film.

No they aren't.

There is no onscreen violence. This was hitchcock's intention.

You are already told he is alive by cross but or more appropriately, a time lapse.

The Destroy sequence ending is out of order for a reason.

What's the order got to do with anything? It's pretty obvious that it's out of order.

You do realise that I accept that the intention is to show that Shepard is alive, I just find it an incredibly unsatisfying, stupid way of showing it?

It has everything to do with it.

But you aren't very forthcoming with information.

[Reorte]

Taboo-XX wrote...

It has everything to do with it.

But you aren't very forthcoming with information.

How can you accuse me of that when I've not got a clue what point you were trying to make about order?

[Taboo]

Reorte wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

It has everything to do with it.

But you aren't very forthcoming with information.

How can you accuse me of that when I've not got a clue what point you were trying to make about order?

I'm still not sure what you're arguing to be honest.

The scene is that way for a reason. Suspense and then catharsis.

It eithers works for you or it doesn't.

The plaque scene and the breath scene are days or even weeks apart.

[Reorte]

This is getting nowhere. Can we at least agree to give up for now?

[Pitznik]

Reorte wrote...
I suppose not being satisfied with half-arsed half-measures is my problem, life is so much easier if you just accept what you'd like things to mean.

Again - it is not about what I'd like. What I'd like starts after the game ends. Shepards in high EMS lives, no matter if you like it or not, if you want it or not. This is literally last information given to you by the game. That is the point where my Shepard and your Shepard meet. After that moment everything becomes different, your Shepard looks different than mine, and different people want to reunite with them. This is a strong dramatic accent to end the story.

I wonder what would you think about how The Sopranos ended, they went further than Bioware did

[Taboo]

Reorte wrote...

This is getting nowhere. Can we at least agree to give up for now?

No.

[jkflipflopDAO]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

And this is funny .. what are we still arguing on the forums ....





SPECULATIONS FROM EVERYWHERE !

ARRRG God damn I am so F'n sick of this ambiguous bullsh!t! Was he indoctrinated or not? JUST ANSWER THE QUESTION BIOWARE

[Reorte]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Reorte wrote...

This is getting nowhere. Can we at least agree to give up for now?

No.

Fine, try saying something relevent then instead of going on about time and order and suspense and catharsis when that had never been brought up before and I happen to agree that that's the intention anyway, it's just presented in such a way that I find immensely unsatisfying - even if I were to agree that it 100% means that Shepard is alive and has many years ahead of him.

[lynch108]

This is Shepard's story, and Shepard's story ends with him lying in pile debris taking a breath.  The endings suck.  The best that can be said about them is that they are OK, which is a failure, in my opinion.   Did I REALLY need the entire galaxy's military to get to the beam.  The ending made the rest of the game pointless to me.  Amassing an armada of that scale as a distraction just seemed stupid.  In the first 2 games I felt in control during the final assaults and therefore responsible for the ultimate failure or triumph, at the end of ME3 I felt manipulated like I was a pawn in someone else's game.  It was just a massive letdown for me.  Of course, this is just my opinion.

[zambingo]

MordiMoro wrote...

Mass Effect without Shepard is like Batman without Bruce Wayne: a Dick Grayson dressed a bat.

Many players choose destruction for Shep alive, Bioware do not like, why are recanting once more.

The next release will clarify that Bioware Shep died in the end destroy.

Shep living or dying had no impact on my end choice. Granted I chose Destroy, but my headcanon has Shepard dying anyway... so.

Also I disgree on many levels that Mass Effect without Shepard is Batman without Bruce Wayne; 1. Batman Beyond isn't Bruce and it's awesome. Grayson as Batman was fresh. With that said, yes, Batman is Bruce. 2. Mass Effect Inflitrator is fun and I like the Zaeed/Clint Eastwood PC in that. I could totally play an entire full game as him. 3. If a prequel or sequel is made in the Mass Effect Universe... I don't want to be Shepard again. I wouldn't be pissed if I had to play as Shepard again, but I would prefer something fresh.

Modifié par zambingo, 16 juillet 2012 - 10:19 .

[3DandBeyond]

Reorte wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

They have given you everything to make the ending you want.

The ultimate role playing game.

But people seem to think the only way to reach a semblence of closure is to have a scene with Closer playing in the background.

No. Just No.

If you have complete control over everything it is not a roleplaying game, you're writing a story! Do you honestly not know the difference between playing and writing? You could stop the game at any point in the series and say "Make the rest up as you like" if your position made sense.

I agree.

I see no need for the EC if head canon is all that is necessary.  I see no need for an ending at all because quite frankly a living and reunited (one scene) Shepard is inextricable from the story as a "happier" ending.  It is just as valid if not more so than endings the let us watch the flesh vaporize from Shepard's body.  Why is that more valid?  A game with a story follow certain givens that exist within itself or within others that are in the series.

You don't start playing Mario Kart and end up playing Dress Up Barbie.  And you keep the implicit promises that exist within previous games/stories.  You also play games to win and to "feel" that win.  If you are ok with irrational sacrifice and death that is shown in all its nauseating glory, then you got your "win" ending.  So, those that are happy with what they got, yes that's all that matters.  Just how selfish are you?  Think about it.

All people asked for by and large and continue asking for was mainly one obvious scene that had meaning.  Not the world, not the moon, nor did they ask that all the other endings be trashed because theirs was all that mattered, but that is in effect what people are telling us.  It is an insult whether intended or not to state that I need to use my imagination-it works I can assure you, but I happen to hate movie endings that cheat and provide text to explain what happened.  I believe that you provide an ending and then allow the viewer/player/reader to go on from there and that's fine.  But a torso in rubble is a joke and not an ending and anyone that says otherwise is being needlessly disengenuous.  That's not an ending.  Not in a story about a hero where the hero lives.  So what if other movies or stories would be content with that-that kind of ending might fit in with that kind of story, but it does not fit in here.

ME1 and ME2 both had one scene at least of that recognition that Shepard was alive.  That was not too much to ask for here and since people were expressly told the game would have a reunion it's also another of many slaps in the face of fans.  This is not people asking to see more gore.  It is people that believe somewhat in better things like even romance, kindness, and friendship-good things.  I think others need to ask themselves why they are so deadset against it and feel it's a requirement to tell others they are wrong. 

People need to ask this question before posting and telling people to shut up and use their imaginations, how does it hurt me for someone to want a full and kinder ending?  Some people act as if their lives and reputations depend on proving someone is wrong in wanting an ending that shows a hero alive.  That's just not healthy.

[Reorte]

For the record, what I would've found satisfying - remove the breath scene and replace the Stargazer (so it's post credits) with a hand pulling Shepard out of the rubble (not necessarily a cewmember's hand, that wouldn't make sense), and with Shepard looking alive enough to very definitely not be dead. I'd have still liked an actual reunion but I think this would've been enough for me.

[AresKeith]

Reorte wrote...

For the record, what I would've found satisfying - remove the breath scene and replace the Stargazer (so it's post credits) with a hand pulling Shepard out of the rubble (not necessarily a cewmember's hand, that wouldn't make sense), and with Shepard looking alive enough to very definitely not be dead. I'd have still liked an actual reunion but I think this would've been enough for me.

that would have been much better than a cliffhanger type ending thats completely stupid

[The Twilight God]

Pitznik wrote...

The Twilight God wrote...

It amazes me how people complaining about Biowares are pulling their own Bioware (i.e. ignoring established lore).

The pre-EC endings equated to galactic civilization being snuffed out. As you said, this was already established in Arrival that relays goes boom, star system goes with it. This even if even mentioned at the start of ME3 and by Batarians on the Citadel.

Post-EC there will still be no crew reunion for destroy. The relays are non-functional even if they changed it from exploding to just "severely damaged". And it will take centuries to get repair crews to them all via FTL travel.

Kind of hard to get a happy ending out of this except for Synthesis and Destroy assuming reaper FTL is WAY faster than ours. And if the only way to be "happy" is to collaborate with the Reapers and be stupid enough to trust them for no reason then it's broken writting.

Shouldn't be a problem to reach each and every relay as long as in its system, or even its nebula, there is a world with advanced technology. It's not like you start in the Sol system and go one by one.

You fix Sol Relay. Then you have to FTL to Arcturus which probably isn't that long a trip based on Ashley's comments in ME1 (it's 36 ly). But beyond Arcturus it isn't feasible. Then the trips becomes years long or decades. A repair crew traveling for years just to fix a relay, which is gonna be a big project, isn;t going to be easy. The quarians are really the only species equip to do that.  Everyone else would have to build their own liveships and completely adapt their culture. This isn;t going to happen overnight.

And lets not forget that without reapers nobody knows how relays are built.  How would we even know how to fix them. Our worlds are ruins with no infrastructure and we're all cut off from each other. Sorry, but outlook is bleak. That is what Bioware left us to work with. This is how they planned the endings. The abruptness of the endings were just to try a prevent outrage from straight up telling players that it's a lose lose situation. They have even claimed that the epilogue has stuff that takes place centuries later. But for Shepard and crew there is no happy ending. Garrus and Tali starve to death and the rest are stuck in the star cluster for the foreseeable future.

This is what is wrong with the ending. Not that they didn't show us pretty pictures of how things eventually turn out. But this can be explained away with Control and Synthesis. Only destroy is this bleak. They really took a sh*t all over Destroy. Geth and EDI dead, everyone cut off, crew dead or reduced to hunter gatherers and no upside whatsoever compared to the other endings were everyone is buddy buddy with the reapers.
 

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

wright1978 wrote...

Pitznik wrote...

The breath scene itself is NOT ambiguous. What happens AFTER is. This scene works for each and every Shepard. What happens after would be different for each and every Shepard. This is a good place to stop telling the story. Shepard's survival is the only difference between middle EMS and high EMS. Both the fact that scene is added and how it is presented gives you new information - Shepard lives.

Breath scene is completely ambigious. Without reading the file name you would not even be sure it is Shep.
No it is not a good place to finish telling the story, just as cutting with the Normandy crashed on a distant jungle planet wasn't the place to leave it. High EMS destroy should have showed Shep getting rescued or had Shep reading the epilogue. Something to show categorically that Shep survived. Currently the high ems destroy epilogue is completely isolated from the Shep lives afterthought breath clip.

Exactly right!

[MystEU]

Shepard can survive if you take that hope and believe he did. IT can be true if that's how you want the story to end. Either way, Shepard's story is completely over.

I wonder if there is a post-ME3 game (time-wise) if it might take place in a galaxy outside of the Milky Way so that BioWare doesn't have to explain how Synthesis/Control/Destroy impacts the future. That'd probably be the easy way to do it...

[The Twilight God]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

I do have a really difficult question.

Why is it so difficult to end a story with the hero alive, and still take a hard line on ending their story arc? Bethesda: 600 hrs with the Nerevarine. Goodbye. 600 hrs with the Hero of Cyrodill. Goodbye Sheogorath. They did it.

Was it that hard for the writers to have made one fracking commitment in this series for a single scene at the end where instead of that stupid idiotic breath scene they had Shepard in the hospital recovering being visited by the LI if there was one (sitting in a chair)? (High EMS Destroy) Yes I know no one would pick either Control or Synthesis then.

Incorrect. If synthesis and control were presented ina way that made sense (i.e. I wasn't just blindly accepting the word of a reaper that it would work) I would pick control or synthesis with certain shepards. As it stands now they are just absurdly stupid choices that defy all common sense. Hey, Shepard, go kill yourself and you'll save the galaxy. Derp OK. sure thing reapers.

They threw the Geth and EDI on the Destroy ending. We'd kill them to get this, and BW wouldn't allow us to do that -- purposely "murder innocent robots" (EDI is different), and they wouldn't remove the penalty for picking destroy because that would have required them to do a better job of selling Synthesis and Control. Oh, wait. Silly me, they couldn't. It's hard to sell death by electrocution, and death by swan dive into a death ray.

Destroy offers NOTHING over synthesis and control. They are currently the better endings in EVERY way. Destroy does not have a single benefit over the other two. A breath is nothing. Shep might as well be dead as the player gets no tangible payoff to supposedly surviving. Sorry, but the breath scene isn't the same as knowing Shep survived and reuniting with crew. It's the same as if he was incinerated. I can headcanon shepard returning in Control and Synthesis endings.

The reason they did the EC was they saw this: NO DLC SALES.

They aren't getting any DLC or full game sales from me. I'm done with them.  I'm tired of supporting some "art store" where "artist" experiment with "interpretive art" on my dime. They can be poor like real artists who care more about what they want to express than what a prospective customer wants.